On 02/16/2012 08:06 AM, Scott Sinclair wrote:
> On 16 February 2012 15:08, Thomas Kluyver<takowl@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It strikes me that the effort everyone's put into this thread could
>> have by now designed some way to resolve disputes. ;-)
> This is not intended to downplay the concerns raised in this thread,
> but I can't help myself.
>> I propose the following (tongue-in-cheek) patch against the current
> numpy master branch.
>>https://github.com/scottza/numpy/compare/constitution>> If this gets enough interest, I'll consider submitting a "real" pull request ;-)
>> Cheers,
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org>http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussionNow that is totally disrespectful and just plain ignorant! Not to
mention the inability to count people correctly.
Yes, 'you pushed my button' so to speak.
As I understand it, all the pre-git history just contains the
information of the person who actually committed the change into the
numpy trunk. It does not hold any information of Numeric and the history
of numarray so I really question the accuracy of the counting. Also it
misses many of the 'user' patches that lead to those changes (perhaps
these user-patches are now in git).
The second aspect is time frame as you do get a very different list if
you just restrict it to 'current developers' eg adding '--since="1 year
ago".
It is disrespectful because many of the heated discussions are not about
code per se but about the design and expected behavior. Counting commits
or lines will never tell you any of those things.
So I do agree with David's suggestion.
Bruce